At this morning's oversight hearing for the bicycle and pedestrian advisory councils, Councilmember Jack Evans chastised cyclists who speed on jogging trails, and Tommy Wells expressed interest in exploring restrictions on sidewalk cycling in commercial areas of DC.

Photo by M.V. Jantzen on Flickr.

At the start of the meeting, Evans said that he jogs regularly, and cyclists have almost hit him 3 or 4 times. He also said he's seen cyclists run stop signs once a week, and travel too fast regularly.

Let's put aside the obvious point that Evans probably also sees drivers run stop signs more like once a day, and travel at excessive speed almost constantly, if he doesn't do so himself. Evans is mostly talking about walking and biking paths, like the Capital Crescent Trail near his house, and some people do travel very fast on bikes in ways that intimidates walkers and runners.

Wells said, "If I get a call from Jack around dusk, I know what it's going to be. It is an issue that we have to keep bicycles separated from pedestrians, especially around sidewalks. We do want people walking and jogging. ... In his own way, Jack is a representative for the jogging advisory council, and we do have work to do."

That work might include looking at whether to restrict cycling on sidewalks in some cases. Currently, DC law allows biking on sidewalks except in a central area. Sean Wieland of the Pedestrian Advisory Council testified that in areas like Georgia Avenue in Ward 4, sidewalks are often somewhat narrow and crowded with pedestrians, and cycling there can create problematic conflicts.

TheWashCycle blogger David C. pointed out that the Mayor already has the power to restrict sidewalk cycling in specific areas as desired. He doesn't think DC should ban it outright, as there are times it's the best move, such as climbing up hills when cars drive fast and there are few pedestrians.

People also start and end their rides on sidewalks, or use them for short distances when one-way streets would otherwise force a long detour. If I ride to U Street, my trip home involves a short segment on a one-way street to get to my alley. I ride on the sidewalk for that short stretch, which is by far the most efficient route.

If I ride on the sidewalk, I always make sure to defer to pedestrians. People on bikes must recognize that people on foot have the right of way, and that while the law might allow using sidewalks, anyone riding a bike on one has to be respectful and stay out of the way of people walking. If that means riding no faster than a slow walk, so be it.

Not everyone does this, however. For this reason, Wells expressed interest in considering restrictions on sidewalk cycling in commercial districts. This could make sense when the commercial district has two-way roads, so people can always bike in the street, and the road is not overcrowded. There seems to be little reason to ride on the sidewalk on Barracks Row, for instance, except between one corner and a bicycle rack on that block.

But what about 17th Street in Dupont? BeyondDC often bikes northbound on this street, which is one way north of Massachusetts Avenue. Going to 18th could represent a fairly long detour. 16th is harrowing. 15th is fairly far away.

A lot of people bike the wrong way in the 17th Street bike lane. Generally, they are able to do that without problems, since 17th is a low-traffic road and cars move slowly. That's illegal, however. Riding on the sidewalk is legal, but those sidewalks are very narrow.

It's too bad DDOT and the neighborhood didn't devise a legal and safe way to ride northbound when recently reconstructing the road. There's now a popular Capital Bikeshare station at 17th and Corcoran. If someone wants to ride there from, say, the station at 17th and L, there's no legal, direct way to do so. As we are seeing in practice, many people are not willing to detour to 16th or 18th for this type of trip.

DC Councilmember Jack Evans (Ward 2) claimed this morning that the 15th Street bike lane is "not working" because of the impact on drivers from the new left turn signals.

Photo by Eric Gilliland on Flickr.

Evans generally emphasized that he supports bike lanes and committed to keeping the lane in place, but criticized the new, two-way version of the 15th Street lane. He said that the turn restrictions have further narrowed 15th for most drivers, and that the delays in turning make drivers miss green lights on adjacent streets.

When DDOT converted the lane to two-way, it added left turn signals at the intersections where cars can turn left from 15th across the bike lane. Formerly, cars could turn left or right off 15th anytime when they have the green light. Now, during most of the green phase, left-turning drivers have a red arrow; they can then turn at the end of the green phase just before cross traffic gets the green.

Without this, drivers would turn left and many would not look for a cyclist traveling in the bike lane in the same direction. This restriction is an important step to make the two-way lane safe, and given that people haven't been getting hit, it seems to achieve this end.

However, it also frustrates drivers. On Twitter, Tom Sherwood said that he's heard a lot of complaints about "long waits" for these lights. TwistedTidings replied, "It's also annoying when drivers make those turns far too close to crossing pedestrians. City living means annoyance."

Evans alleged that bicycle advocates are reluctant to look into problems with the lane because they don't want to open up the possibility of shrinking or eliminating the lane. People "don't want to give an inch when [they] get an inch," he said.

Is that true, or is this just an issue of drivers being furious at losing even the smallest amount of privilege? Traffic still moves fine on 15th, though it's become less of a speedway. DDOT modified the lane to reduce the number of bollards, for instance, based on resident comments that the bollards were unsightly.

Or does the lane go too far to inconvenience drivers for little bicycle benefit? DDOT had a lot of public meetings before creating the lane's first version, though they went ahead with this new iteration based on professional judgment and very little public discourse. Some bike advocates love the two-way option, while others don't like it.

Personally, I rode a bicycle and drove on the street in both iterations. Riding in the rightmost sharrow lane on 15th when the cycle track was one-way, cars repeatedly tailgated me, passed extremely close and cut back into my lane rapidly after passing me. The drivers generally seemed impatient and surprised to have to deal with a person on a bicycle in the street. With the new lane, it's very comfortable.

Driving on the road, it's more time-consuming to drive up 15th and turn left on P to get home versus going through Scott Circle. As a result, I'm less likely to take 15th when driving. This seems to be a benefit for residents, who generally would prefer drivers use the main arteries like Massachusetts Avenue and 16th Street than residential streets like 15th, P, and R.

When Evans talks about the bike lane, he seems to acknowledge that the lane is valuable on an intellectual level, but then react to specifics on a personal level from his experiences driving and not from using the lane on a bicycle. I hope Evans would try bicycling in the area a few times as well.

Still, there are indeed a lot of complaints. Are there ways to address these concerns without making the lane dangerous? Could modifications lead to a bicycle facility that is as good (or better) for cyclists, while also gaining more neighbor and driver support?

I can't believe Toy Story 3 didn't win the best picture Oscar. I haven't been this upset since Wall-E lost.

A Baltimore cyclist is in serious condition after a being hit by a car on Saturday. "The man was riding his bike in a marked lane on Saturday when he was struck by an 83-year-old woman who was attempting to make a right turn....No citations or charges have been filed."

College Park, like Alexandria, is hoping to join CaBi on a small scale soon. "officials are still searching for funds to implement a two-year trial program, with plans for single stations in three locations: the College Park Metro station, downtown College Park along Route 1 and the Hollywood commercial district near the Capital Beltway...officials now want to apply for a $66,000 grant from the Maryland Heritage Areas Authority, but still would need more funds -- the program would cost $136,000 to operate for two years." There might be more stations in College Park, if UMD is succesful in adding some.

In preparing the second environmental assessment for the Rock Creek Park Multi-Purpose Trail, officials must consider that the 3,000-foot Rose Park segment is a separate pedestrian path that runs through a neighborhood park and must not be treated as a multi-use trail.

Correction: the path already is a multi-use trail. What Mr. Mitchell is asking is that it be changed into a pedestrian path.

I would never consider riding my bike on that short stretch of footpath because of the dangers this would pose to my neighbors and their children/pets.

Maybe not, though I have ridden it many times without disaster, but this is the reason the trail should be widened - to make it safer.

Others who are less familiar with Rose Park are not likely to be as respectful when they’re looking for a shortcut between Georgetown and Dupont Circle, which is all that the wider pathway would provide.

Is that all it would provide? A useful, safe connection between two popular areas of town? So it's practically useless then, huh?

I have personally witnessed numerous “close calls” and a handful of accidents/conflicts between bicycles and pedestrians in the narrow stretch of path between the toddler play area and steep hillside.

Again, the current trail is too narrow, of course you'll see conflict and close calls. The current trail is narrower than the recommended minimum safe width. What else would you expect?

I don’t like to “rat out” my fellow cyclists, but the individuals who choose to ride on the pedestrian path now seldom dismount out of respect for others.

You're not ratting anyone out. It's not a pedestrian path, and no one is required to dismount.

Making the path wider in other parts of Rose Park would only make matters worse.

The experts disagree with you. And if making it wider is bad, maybe we should make it narrower?

Bicycles are simply not compatible with all the strollers and tricycles in the area.

Whoa, I hope those tricycle riders are dismounting - out of respect. More accurately, please visit the Capital Crescent Trail where you'll often see tricycles and strollers, without it being a recipe for disaster. What Mitchell is arguing is that multi-use trails are dangerous. Which is wrong and saying so is irresponsible.

Signs and maps — and construction resources — should instead encourage cyclists to use the existing Multi-Use Trail along Rock Creek Parkway.

Though the two are parallel, they're not really comparable due to large elevation difference. Few would use the RCPT to get from Adams Morgan to Georgetown in this way.

It would also promote use of the newly built Capital Bikeshare station at 30th and K streets

A bike share station may go in at the M street trailhead.

It would be dangerous to channel increased bicycle traffic directly onto M Street (where there is fast-moving traffic and a 6-inch granite curb) or the already busy pedestrian sidewalk where the proposed Rose Park Multi-Use Trail would come to a full stop.

That's why they're considering a curb ramp. Also, he's saying that cyclists don't belong on trails if they're used by tricycles, strollers, the elderly, walkers or runners; or on busy pedestrian sidewalks or on roads with a 25 mph speed limit like M Street NW. Where does Mitchell ride his bike? Because there doesn't appear to be much left.

I believe there are plenty of existing roadways that provide safe riding in and around Georgetown for responsible bicyclists like me.

But not M street or any street like it. Also, someone is pretty proud of themselves.

Widening the path would not only encourage more bicycle use through an area that is not well-suited for two-wheeled traffic,

It would be well suited were it widened.

but it would also actually encourage these riders to go faster (take this from one who knows).

You won't mind if I require a higher standard for my facts, will you?

In addition to the increased risk of accidents, turning the pedestrian path into a bicycle thoroughfare would also likely lead to additional litter (and increased maintenance costs for the D.C. Department of Transportation and National Park Service).

He does have a point here. While biking full speed past old ladies pushing strollers, I often take time to empty bags of trash into parks. That's what my panniers are for.

Also, the added water runoff would likely cause increased erosion on the hillside.

I have more faith in the engineers at DDOT than you do. There are several good ways to handle runoff, including permeable material.

Areas adjacent to the path would be almost certain to become a rutted, muddy mess,

Why are the areas next to the path being rutted? And how would that be different if the trail were narrower?

and grass in the park would be crisscrossed with makeshift pathways from cyclists taking shortcuts.

Which is why we should also ban pedestrians and their damned penchant for creating desire lines. Scofflaws!

In sum, turning the pedestrian path into a multi-use trail is likely to upset the current peaceful character of Rose Park for the whole community.

In sum, it's currently a multi-use path and things seem peaceful to me. Widening it from 5 feet to 8 or 10 feet is not going to turn Rose Park into Tripoli. It will, however, bring it into line with accepted, best safety practices.

Maillot Jaune: A California cyclist was hit in a right hook. In the civil trial that followed [the driver] "admitted that, immediately prior to turning, she had not looked in her rear or side view mirrors, nor had she looked over her right shoulder. When asked why she did not check her mirrors, Goodell stated that she did not see or pass any bicyclists while driving down Mission and therefore had "no reason . . . to believe there would be a cyclist" on her right hand side." Two witnesses and the cyclist contradicted parts of the driver's testimony. But the driver's laywer argued that "if we had a video camera on every driver in Southern California, you probably wouldn't see one who turns around and looks over at the curb and behind them. Why would you? There's no reason to, okay?" and the jury agreed. On appeal, the cyclist argued that the witness instructions were flawed and lost there too.

In one study in which drivers were asked how they feel about cyclists, one of the recurring labels was "unpredictable." When asked to elaborate, drivers often blamed the "attitudes and limited competence" of the cyclists themselves, rather than the "difficulty of the situations that cyclists are often forced to face on the road." When asked to describe their own actions or those of other drivers, however, they blamed only the situation. Psychologists call this the "fundamental attribution error."

So drivers, perhaps already stressed out from being late for work or stuck in traffic, then have to negotiate their way around a vehicle they essentially don't understand, causing even more stress, which they tend to attribute to something about cyclists. It's a vicious cycle—most vicious, in terms of actual harm, for cyclists.

Podium - The mayor of Seattle had his bike stolen. Something like that could never happen here. I feel like I wrote a post about all the mayors who've had their bike stolen, but I can't find it. It's a surprisingly large club.

Maillot Vert: Boston is working on a 600 bike, public bike system. We should root for that to be a Bixi system, since DC members will likely be able to use those bikes with their existing keys, and Boston members use ours. There is quite a bit about DC's system in the article.

Chris Holben manages the Capital Bikeshare program for the Washington DC Department of Transportation... Holben said that, since launching in September, 169,000 trips have been made on CaBi bikes (1-1.5 trips per bike per day), mostly by CaBi’s 5,500 annual members. The average trip takes 12 minutes, and covers a little over a mile. Holben expects the number of trips to jump as the weather comes around: “We have had 1,200 day users, which is pretty low compared to cities that launched in the summer… We haven’t captured the day-use market yet.”

“I do see it as a game changer,” agreed Holben, citing the greater number of bikes on the road and the visual impact of CaBi’s bright red bikes. “I think cars see them more because they’re unique… Once the spring season hits they’re going to be everywhere.”

CaBi has tried to address this challenge through education and working with local shops to offer users a discount on helmets. This strategy seems to be working. “We haven’t had a lot of blowback on it.”

Maillot a Pois Rouge: The velodrome for the 2012 London games is the first facility completed. "London 2012 organizers are predicting the track will be the fastest in the world." You can see video of it at the link.

Maillot Blanc: The 2009 FHWA Traffic Safety Facts report for Bicyclists and other cyclists is available. As reported earlier, cyclist fatalities are down to 630 from 718 the year before, but as a percentage of total traffic fatalities they remain at 1.9% higher than any other time in the last decade. All traffic fatalities are down 17% and crashes down 13% since 2000, even as vehicle miles traveled have risen by more than 8%.

70% of bicycle fatalities occur in urban areas, and 67% at non-intersections.

Night-time fatalities make up 27% of the total and are down as a percentage from 2008.

The average age of killed cyclists is 41, up from 35 in 2000. Children now make up 13% of cycling fatalities, down from 28% in 2000.

87% were male.

28% of bicyclists killed had a blood alcohol concentration of .01 grams per deciliter (which means they had been drinking) and 24% were at .08 grams per deciliter (which means they were visibly drunk). In 40% of fatalities, either the cyclist or driver were drinking and in 33% of them one of the two was drunk.

Virginia (1.5%) and DC (0%) had cyclist fatality rates below the national average of 1.9%. Maryland was slightly higher (2%).

I used to go to see the animated Oscar shorts with some friends who've since moved away. So now I send the ones available on youtube or elsewhere to them. I thought I'd also drop the links in here for those who are interested. I also included the 1 minute clip of Let's Pollute, since it seems somewhat related. It looks good.

Join Potomac Pedalers and Adventure Cycling Association - North America's largest cycling membership organization - for a special presentation by Executive Director Jim Sayer on the joys of bicycle travel and cool projects happening at the national and state level. Jim will be in the area for the National Bike Summit but will metro from downtown DC to Arlington to meet with anyone interested in traveling by bike and also national transportation policy. He’ll touch on Adventure Cycling’s new bicycle routes and maps (including the new Sierra Cascades Bicycle Route and the planned Bicycle Route 66), a new website with resources on "bike overnights", plus a status report on development of the official US Bicycle Route System (USBRS).

Join them on Wednesday, March 9th at the Rhodeside Grill, 1836 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22201, near the Courthouse Metro station. For more information visit http://www.rhodesidegrill.com/.

Socializing starts at 6:30pm and the presentation will run from 7:00 to 8:30pm. Food and beverages will be available and for purchase.

Please RSVP by March 5th by responding to this email or calling Sarah Raz at 800-755-2453 x 210. You're encouraged to invite friends or family.

They're looking for a few volunteers to help with the event. Please contact Rich Tepel (richtepel@me.com) if you are willing and able to assist!